I told you guys some of you would see the D5100 as an "upgrade" to the D7000. I think the D5100 will become the "D90" of the future. In other words it will give you "pro" image quality in an "amateur" body and price. I'm sure many will even call it a "back-up" for the D7000 or "D400"

I do not see the D5100 being an "upgrade" factor to the D7000 or the D90. I think they are close, but still a very large gap.

Main things I look at that the 5100 falls short: (I think my top 4 is where all consumer cameras fall short of the pro-sumer and pro models.)
1) Lack of AF motor - This is huge for anyone with a collection of older glass
2) Metering is still the low 420 area
3) Viewfinder
4) AF Points
Other things that I look at: Battery life, Dual card, Shutter speed, High Speed Sync

To me my top 4 shows how much different the D5100 is from the D90 or D7000 and any pro-sumer camera.

The video has much upgraded items and looks fairly good as does the IQ.

As a working back-up? No - The D7000 would get my nod. As a second, walk around - fun body, I could maybe go for that.

BUT Lack of AF motor!

There are 72 current Nikon lenses. Of the current, 60 lenses are AF and 21 need the AF Drive. Of my 16 lenses, 6 are AFS G lenses. I only have 1 Nikon lens that is not in the current catalog, the 24-85mm AFS 3.5-4.5G (Yep an AF-S G is the only one not in the catalog).

I do not think that the D5100 is an upgrade to the D7000 due to some differences that may be minor to most of the photographers. (Size, Max. Shutter Speed, Viewfinder coverage, Environmentally sealed) although the newer camera has nice video functions that the D7000 does not have.

Yes, it could be a backup camera due to the fact that the cameras are almost similar.

I have several older Nikon lenses. The lack of an AF motor doesn't bother me one bit. I miss the aperture ring waaaay more then the focus motor in such a compact body. I think the D5100 is a worthy "upgrade/back-up" for the price. I won't be surprised if the "same" D7000 sensor from the D5100 ranks higher on the DXO scale either. Like when the "amateur" D90 ranked higher then the "pro" D300. Think Pentax K-5 too.

Very tough call Niko both those bodies the D5100 and D7000 are major steps forward for Nikon. Does it have to be a DX upgrade? Its easier to assume that there will be a FX body coming next wouldn't you think? It sounds like you want the D300s refresh.

I have to agree on the Aperture ring especially on the primes where I do want to shoot them with film as well. I shoot older range finders and FE2s but the focus screens and magnification on the consumer (even my D300) bodies really fall short for my preference.

IMO DXO is way overrated and uses smoke and mirrors to try to make themselves relevant. A few points = 1% or less. We all use software noise reduction and if something is not at least 1-2 stops better at every ISO it doesn't make much of a difference in my experience.

Don't get me wrong, I think the D5100 is a great update and I'm excited to see what the D400 on up will have when they get released. I just don't see it surpassing anything above it. Replacing a D90? I'm not sure due to my reasons above.

I think the biggest news that no one is talking about is the move from 12-bit to 14-bit NEF files. That will increase the IQ dramatically from previous versions. Now if we can get the D400 and above to 16bit - hold on to your hats, that medium format Hasselblad realm!

TaoTeJared said:
1) Lack of AF motor - This is huge for anyone with a collection of older glass
2) Metering is still the low 420 area
3) Viewfinder
4) AF Points

I would add that the D5100's pentamirror, rather than the D7000's pentaprism, is the biggest stumbling block for me regarding considering a "downgrade" to a D5100 for its articulating screen (specifically, for filmmaking applications). Although, it's true, that the optical viewfinder would be used far less frequently, than the LCD, when shooting video.

Well I can see some of the missing features in the D5100 that others would want in a semi-pro body such as the in body AF motor and the top LCD (I think these are the two biggest items). I don't ever shoot video so that doesn't appeal to me in any way, but having the D5000 I have used the movable LCD on several occasions for weird angle shots and I would miss not having it. I actually think I have taken several of my best pictures using the screen in a non-standard position holding the camera by the ground or over my head. Overall I think the D5100 lacks the more pro level features of the D7000 for most to consider it, but it like the D5000 offers a good bang for the buck. I say I wish I had a D90 instead of the D5000 for the in body AF motor, but on the other hand it keeps you with updated lenses because they all have to be AF-S...they just cost more. So if you don't have the funds it can be a downer, but if you are just starting out and have the money it really makes no difference. I don't think there are too many old lenses that out do the newer AF-S versions.

kanuck said:
Very tough call Niko both those bodies the D5100 and D7000 are major steps forward for Nikon. Does it have to be a DX upgrade? Its easier to assume that there will be a FX body coming next wouldn't you think? It sounds like you want the D300s refresh.

I agree, next one should be a FX body, that would mean that if you want a DX body, there is nothing to wait for, however, should you be thinking to move up to FX, then the wait might be worth it.

However, consider that moving to FX you would want to move away from the "cheap" consumer grade lens.

Godless said:
I think you are totally wrong. The D7000 IS the D90 of today and tomorrow.

And as to what you should get, I vote for D800. Or D4.

I believe you are wrong. Even though the features of the D7000 are similar to the D90 such as the AF screw motor and the top LCD, they have done away with the D90. It was already said the D7000 didn't replace the D90 and because the D90 and D5000 were so close they phased the D90 out and now have the D3100, D5100 and D7000. There really is no D90 replacement, but they made the gap more noticable between bodies. Each with a little more features.

casperwb said:
The present shortage of pro lens would push the prices above the sky high level that they are right now.

Therefore, I am sticking with DX as it is what I can afford.

What I want is a different kettle of fish.

+1

I am half way through a roll of boring Kodak film in my FTn and while I am convinced the limit of IQ on my DX DSLR's is my lenses - as a non-pro, I simply cannot spend the money on going to FX DSLR.

I have noticed the prices of ALL DSLRs going up too (as have most of us) not just for FX, which means for now at least, if I can't get it used, I can't buy it. Like you say; want is not the same as need, and right now, I need to ensure I can pay my mortgage - my wife is a federal employee, so with all the threats of close downs, furloughs etc, spending several thousand dollars on photography this month is not going to happen!

Well, for $399, the D7000 was simply irresistible, so that is what I went with.

I think that the D7000 has many qualities that keeps it well ahead of the D5100. One simple one is that the layout of the buttons is very similar to the D700, so I can go back and forth between the two bodies with ease. To me, the articulated rear screen would be a huge annoyance, never an asset, so that would pretty much have kept me from ever getting the D5000 or D5100.

A friend at work just got a refurbished D5000 and I had a chance to look at it. Having handled it and tried to set some simple things (like bracketing and multi-shot mode) the hassles of setting the stuff turned me off. The D700 and D7000 can switch to continuous low or high at the twist of a dial and bracketing is equally easy. I hate digging through menus or info screens to do such simple tasks.

I recently got the D7K, so I'm out of the market, but I don' think the D5100 would be in the running for me, and now that I have the D7K, I don't think it is in the same category as the D7K.

Video is important to me, and I shot a small spot last night for a training company using the D7K that will look like it was shot on 35mm film. (I don't mean to confuse the issue - the D5100 has the same capability - but where I'm going is that) the D7K allows dual card capture of RAW/JPG and or video, weather toughness, lens motor, high sync, horizon level, and a host of features I use every day that I would miss if I had to give up.

I recently got the D7K, so I'm out of the market, but I don' think the D5100 would be in the running for me, and now that I have the D7K, I don't think it is in the same category as the D7K.

Video is important to me, and I shot a small spot last night for a training company using the D7K that will look like it was shot on 35mm film. (I don't mean to confuse the issue - the D5100 has the same capability - but where I'm going is that) the D7K allows dual card capture of RAW/JPG and or video, weather toughness, lens motor, high sync, horizon level, and a host of features I use every day that I would miss if I had to give up.

It just doesn't seem in the same league as the D7K.

My best,

Mike

You hit the nail on the head mike.

my vote

the big question is , will we er see a D310 or D400, or is the D7000 at the top of the hill in DX for now?

NikoDoby said:
I have several older Nikon lenses. The lack of an AF motor doesn't bother me one bit. I miss the aperture ring waaaay more then the focus motor in such a compact body. I think the D5100 is a worthy "upgrade/back-up" for the price. I won't be surprised if the "same" D7000 sensor from the D5100 ranks higher on the DXO scale either. Like when the "amateur" D90 ranked higher then the "pro" D300. Think Pentax K-5 too.

+ 1 Niko, I also miss the aperture ring.

as for d5100, well, as You know I already have d300s and d3s and I'm seriously thinking to sell my nex-5 to get the d5100 as a small, travel companion in all the places where d3s/d300s is too big to carry.

D90 owner here and I say D7000 > D90 > D5100. My biggest beef against D5100 is lack of AF motor. I bought a D90 to become a serious amateur, but I am still an amateur. The easiest way to getting better results while on an amateur's budget is to get great glass of the AF-D type for less $$$. It also allows me to save more for the FX body at some point down the road (and have some lenses ready for it).

Jealous of D7000 obviously. D5100 is both very appealing and disappointing as a D90 replacement. Ignoring video in the argument...

D5100 cons (top 3 IMO):
Lack of AF motor
Lack of buttons (assuming similar to D5000 here, have not confirmed)
Lack of top LCD screen which I personally find invaluable (and I never had a film camera to develop bias)

It would all depend upon the features most important to the purchaser. I would choose the D7000 but that is just because I don't use the video feature and I need the highest relatively noise free ISO I can get to shoot high school basketball in dimly lit gyms. Thus, my needs determine my choice. Other needed would dictate a different choice.

Holly crap $399 for a D7K?! Thats insane! Maybe the best price I have ever heard on anything so new. I would have gotten as many as possible and sold some where I live for a serious profit. What a steal...

kanuck said:
Holly crap $399 for a D7K?! Thats insane! Maybe the best price I have ever heard on anything so new. I would have gotten as many as possible and sold some where I live for a serious profit. What a steal...

Hi Kanuck, if read Jorpet's comments correctly, you'd also have to order the 14-24 and 70-200 lenses to get the discounted price on the camera. IOW, since he was getting the lenses _anyway_, the $399 was a cheap add on.

I've been really liking my D7K. I just got back from a small shoot and enjoy the flexibility of it in every way.

I would wish I was younger (anyway), but would really like to be out and about with the camera as a youngster. It's just terrific.

I don't know if it is a game changer. I'm not even sure I would know what that would call for. The D3X is in that territory.

NikoDoby said:
I won't be surprised if the "same" D7000 sensor from the D5100 ranks higher on the DXO scale either. Like when the "amateur" D90 ranked higher then the "pro" D300. Think Pentax K-5 too.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if the 5100 ranked a little lower than the 7000 as far as noise performance goes... If you look at RAW samples from dpreview, they look identical until above 800 ISO, both slightly above the 60D... past 800, the 5100 takes a dive to where I would say that it even falls behind the 60D, while the 7000 stays on top of of the DX pack.

Keep in mind that the D90 came out halfway through the life cycle of the D300, the 5100 is only 2 quarters behind the 7000

As far as features go, the D7000 and 5100 are in completely different leagues, most people haven't even mentioned things that for me are dealbreakers:
Larger body (with better build)
Front control dial
More direct-access controls via physical buttons/switches
User modes
Top LCD (5100 doesn't even have an eye sensor to make the rear work as a fitting settings screen)
Higher capacity battery